^ 



D 525 
.F4 
Copy 1 



An Answer to 

The Rev. Newell Dwight Hillis' Sermon, 

Recently Delivered from the Old 

Brooklyn Tabernacle, the Theme 

of which was Militarism 

vs. Americanism. 

By George Oglethorpe Ferguson. 



By trj'nsf^^ 



The V 






AN ANSWER TO THE REV. NEWELL DWIGHT HIL- 
LIS' SERMON, RECENTLY DELIVERED FROM 
THE OLD BROOKLYN TABERNACLE, THE 
THEME OF WHICH WAS MILITAR- 
ISM VS. AMERICANISM. 

By George Oglethorpe Ferguson. 

As the Rev. Newell Dwight Hillis from the ''People's 
Forum" as the peerless Beecher was fond of designating his 
pulpit, was courageous enough to violate the advisory procla- 
mation of our President that we Americans should remain 
neutral in word and works, I trust I may be allowed my 
say from the seat of the national Capital, without bringing 
down upon me anything worse than a hazing at the hands 
of the President and his Cabinet. 

Lest it be charged that I am approaching this great inter- 
national theme from the point of view of national prejudice 
or racial bigotry, let me state that I am a Scotch-American 
with four generations of pretty good stufiE behind me on both 
branches of the ancestral tree; my ancestors having been 
cradled in the freedom, faith and hope of the old Scotch 
Covenanters. 

Dr. Hillis did not follow the usual custom of clergymen 
and begin his famous discourse with a text from the Bible. 
I propose to begin my lay sermon in answer to Dr. Hillis 
with two texts at the outstart and follow with a third later 
on. 

"Come let us reason together" 
"The Truth shall make you free" 

I shall not follow the general order of Dr. Hillis, for I 
believe he began with a false premise, and certainly an un- 
fair arrangement of his theme when he fixed it as Mili- 
tarism vs. Americanism and then dealt only with what he re- 
gards as the supreme principle idealizing Americanism, and 
only compared it with German Militarism. I propose to 
broaden my theme and be fair, and give a square deal by fix- 



ing it as GERMANISM-ENGLISHISM vs. AMERICAN- 
ISM. 

This ENGLISHISM may be a new ^*ism" even to the think- 
ing mind of Dr. Hillis. I do not propose to deal in gen- 
eralities, nor take allopathic extracts from theories long 
ago discarded by the actual practices of national govern- 
ments. I propose to deal with specific facts supported by 
indubitable evidence, and institute a thorough impartial 
comparison between the three "isms," and as to the first 
two in their relation to and responsibility for the present 
war. Let us first approach without fear and trembling, 
and analyze in the light of reason and without the subjective 
prejudice resulting from the English subsidized American 
Press, the full meaning of Militarism. As our marcescent 
martial souls have not yet been able to understand that this 
word is applicable to anv nation in its governmental policy 
excepting Germany, we will take GERMAN MILITARISM. 
Dr. Hillis in his premise on the subject reminds me very 
much of the woman I once knew who kept her children under 
fair discipline by constantly telling them the ''Bogy" man 
would get them if they did not obey, and to support her de- 
ception she kept a manufactured "bogy" man under her 
bed — an old fashioned bed having a curtain around the entire 
bottom. Occasionally in the dark she would draw forth 
this "bogy" man and expose it from an advantageous point 
of view to the children and frighten them almost out of 
their senses. In reading Dr. Hillis' one-sided expose of 
German Militarism I could not help thinking of this mother. 
This "bogy" man of German Militarism thrust upon the 
American mind by the English bureaucratic Press has be- 
come such a bugaboo that it has undoubtedly found a firm 
place under Dr. Hillis' bed, and if we are to judge from our 
newspapers, under the beds of about three-fourths of our 
country's population. 

What Is Militarism? 

Let us try intelligently and without bias to analyze it 
and so give ourselves a correct definition of it. It is a policy 
of national defense, based upon the necessities arising from 
the situation and environment of a nation. Germany is 



nearly an inland nation; without the great Kiel Canal she 
would be almost practically so. She is surrounded by 
nations that from the old feudal period have been her 
enemies. Her Militarism consists of a policy that requires 
her boys to go through a school of military and economic 
discipline for a period of time that will render them not 
only fit for the defense of their country, but which renders 
them fit to meet and fight in superior fashion the battles 
of life. When these young men come forth from their mili- 
tary period of schooling under the ''baneful" influence of the 
Kaiser's "Imperial Militarism," they go out into the diversi- 
fied avenues of human endeavor and take their places ac- 
cording to natural selection as to temperament, environ- 
ment, opportunity, etc. ; and the result is that they are pre- 
eminently successful because they have had instilled into 
them not a few, but all the great basic principles that have 
been thought out, worked out and scientifically demonstrated 
to be practical and essential to achievement in every de- 
partment of a nation's life and growth. With this some- 
what brief analysis of Militarism, we get the simple defini- 
tion that GERMAN MILITARISM is a carefully thought 
out and wrought out system of national defense and develop- 
ment in its many diversified departments according to the 
requirements and necessities of geographic position, so as 
to insure an harmonious autonomy. Any nation that has 
less Militarism than this is a nation of weaklings. 

If it is what Dr. Hillis explains it to be, then perforce 
it must have wrought a most disastrous effect upon the 
German character; it must have superinduced at the very 
heart of the Nation an infectious growth which should have 
by this time spread and eaten out the very life vitals of 
the Nation. What has been the effect? To answer this 
question would be an insult to every man's intelligence who 
has traveled through Germany, or known the German- 
Americans living among us. When Dr. Hillis says that the 
6,000,000 of German-Americans in this country are here as 
a protest against GERMAN MILITARISM, I am sorry for 
his misinformation, his lack of acquaintance with and 
his misinterpretation of the subject. I know hundreds of 
our German people; I have talked with many of their 
leaders, and they are here because of the superabundant op- 



portunities natural to a new and great country like America. 
They are here because of the circumscribed field of opera- 
tions for their sturdy qualities in their own country; and 
mark this well: I know for a fact that three-fourths of 
the German-American men have already '^suffered" — from 
Dr. Hillis' point of view — the terrible withering influence 
on their individuality of German Militarism before com- 
ing to our shores. If anyone doubts the patriotism of the 
German-Americans and their love for and devotion to the 
Kaiser for what he has done for his people, and to the spirit 
and institutions of the Fatherland, let him go out as I 
have done and sit among them and discuss with them the 
theme of Dr. Hillis' sermon. If Dr. Hillis will examine the 
immigration records for the past fifteen years he will find 
that the young men of Germany have not been leaving the 
Fatherland for the reason that the Kaiser has shown him- 
self to be a genius in the development of German commerce. 
He has gone through the Empire seemingly with a magic 
wand and wherever he has touched any form of industrial 
life it has grown at once into giant proportions. 

Dr. Hillis says in his sermon referring to the German- 
American element in this country : 

"They are the most honest and esteemed folk in 
American life. Their achievements are beyond praise. 
* * * What wealth among their bankers! What 
prosperity among the German manufacturers ! What 
solidity of manhood in these German Lutherans ! Was 
there ever a finer body of farming folk than the Ger- 
man landowners of the middle west? The Republic 
owes the German-American a great debt as to liberty 
through men like Carl Schurz. Take Martin Luther 
and German liberty of thought out of the Republic 
and this land would suffer an immeasurable loss." 

(Is it possible if Dr. Hillis' description of Imperial Mili- 
tarism under the Kaisers past and present is correct that 
there could be any liberty of thought growing out of such a 
soil?) Strange, is it not, that a man of his thinking powers 
should destroy his complete argument against Germanism, 
or if you prefer German Militarism, by this admission? If 
his argument is logical, they ought to be arrogant, selfish, 



domineering, autocratic, and especially what Englishmen 
characterize them, "hoggish." They ought to be intolerant 
of restraint under law, forever forcing their ego upon their 
neighbors and trying by all means except fair means, to 
defeat their competitors in finance and commerce and gen- 
erally to be wholly a law unto themselves. 

At another point in his sermon Dr. Hillis states "no one 
has indicted German Militarism in stronger language than 
the distinguished Carl Schurz." Dr. Hillis ought to know, if 
he does not, that Carl Schurz expatriated himself for the 
same reason that Waldorf Astor expatriated himself — be- 
cause of keen disappointment to secure political preferment 
conforming to his ambition. 

Dr. Hillis says "the American could not endure Mili- 
tarism." What does he mean by this? Does he mean that 
the manhood of the nation could not, or would not go 
through the ordeal of training and discipline necessary to 
fit it for patriotic defense? Then I am sorry for my country. 
He also says "the American editor would choke to death 
in Germany. If a man criticises the Kaiser he goes to jail." 
I have read the German newspapers when in Germany, 
and the Berlin papers very often here at home. An honest 
criticism of the Kaiser is not at all uncommon and every 
one knows that the Socialists are the worst ofl'enders in 
committing this "terrible" crime of Lese Majeste. Have the 
German Socialists ever been banished to some Siberia, been 
imprisoned, or had their tongues cut out by order of this 
autocratic Imperial Military Lord? There are a good many 
American editors who ought to choke to death. When lib- 
erty of the Press and free speech run riot to license in 
humiliating caricature and stigmatic denunciation of our 
Presidents, we have a martyred Garfield and a martyred 
McKinley. That part of the Press representing the "Stal- 
wart" wing of the Republican Party, assassinated Garfield. 
The venom of unusual party strife reeking in newspapers 
controlled by disappointed politicians, assassinated Mc- 
Kinley. All that Lese Majeste means is, that decent criti- 
cism and common courtesy shall be conceded the Kaiser. 
It is a thousand pities we have not this much Lese Majeste 
in America. Let us now examine ENGLISHISM and what 
it stands for. 



6 

Englishism. 

Is it not passing strange that Dr. Hillis makes no refer- 
ence whatever to ENGLISH MILITARISM in his extra- 
ordinary sermon? What is English history as regards her 
Militarism on the seas? England being an insular nation, 
that is, in her original possessions, found it just as impor- 
tant and essential to build up a colossal SEA MILITARISM 
as Germany from her position inland found it necessary to 
build up an equally powerful land militarism. With this 
colossal naval power England has plowed the seas, bullying 
and ravaging other nations. Aside from her original terri- 
tory; and her North American possessions fairly and hon- 
orably taken from the French by her great General James 
Wolfe in 1759, England has stolen every other part of her 
Empire; and when India and Egypt and South Africa pro- 
tested against the steal of their country and revolted at 
their impressed servitude, England, with unspeakable fury, 
tyranny and cruelty, poured her shot and shell among the 
helpless men, women and children in terrible slaughter and 
— a la Mahomet — said ''Follow our Lord and Master the 
King, or take the sword." 

Let us be fair, Dr. Hillis, and bear in mind the Cape Col- 
ony, bear in mind Ceylon, bear in mind Khartum, bear in 
mind the outrages upon the Boers; the shameful treatment 
of defenseless women and children in the awful concentra- 
tion camps. I stood in Cairo, Egypt, in the spring of 1896, 
beside a British Captain and watched Lord Kitchener with 
his troops, nearly three-fourths of whom were impressed 
Soudanese, march out of that city on his famous Khartum 
campaign. I remarked to the British Captain: "I should 
not think you could depend on these soldiers when you meet 
the enemy." He replied, "when we get them that far from 
home, they must fight or take the bayonet." Here, Dr. Hil- 
lis, just as everywhere that England has invaded and out- 
raged nations' rights, and just as in the present war, she 
always, either by cunning diplomacy or sheer force, puts the 
other fellow to the front to do the fighting and so far as 
possible saves her own skin. And what was the plea in all 
these world-wide robberies and ravages — England's advan- 



tages are the end that justifies the means." What was the 
real underlying cause of the Napoleonic wars. In spite of 
the carefully censored English histories, it is clearly re- 
vealed that the cause was the same as that which is at the 
very bottom of the present war struggle going on in Europe 
— English greeds ^nyyanj jealousy — which, if fed upon long 
enoughj~~either by the inomdual or the Nation, leads to 
murder. Instance for example as between individuals the 
recent Baff murder in New York. France under Napoleon, 
almost at a single bound, took a high place in the com- 
merce and finance of the world. With apologies to Daniel 
Webster — Napoleon literally smote the rock of national re- 
sources and torrential streams of revenue poured forth. 
So England, looking upon these great strides being made 
by France and recognizing in Napoleon the mightiest genius 
for statecraft and government the world had ever known — 
not excepting Caesar — goes through the various stages of 
jealousy, envy and hate and on to murder; and under the 
specious plea that democracy in Europe is not to be thought 
of or tolerated : no matter what the cost, NAPOLEON MUST 
GO. England proceeds to form one coalition after another, 
and with her cunningly devised diplomacy was able to bring 
in neighboring nations to help pull her French chestnuts out 
of the fire and do the brunt of the fighting ; and when at the 
last moment the great French nation is depleted of her 
men and means for carrying the struggle further, and the 
hard-pressed Napoleon is making his last stand, she was 
shrewd enough to slip in Lord Wellington as Commander- 
in-Chief of the allied forces and bear off the glory of the 
conquest of the French under the mighty Napoleon. Her 
brutal confinement of Napoleon on barren St. Helena is an 
eternal stigma on her National Escutcheon. 

How any intelligent student of the world's affairs for 
the past 25 years can fail to see anything from any angle 
in the present European struggle excepting the jealousy and 
envy and hatred of England for Germany, born of her in- 
satiable greed and desperate determination to be and re- 
main supreme monarch of the world's commerce and finance, 
seems to me to be incomprehensible even to the most extra- 
ordinary mind. And now, just as in the Napoleonic wars, 



8 

under the workings of her trained cunning diplomats, she 
has coalesced France, Russia, Japan and even little Belgium 
in an alliance to help her decimate the German Empire ; and 
when she gets ready — if she is able to get ready — to pull her 
German chestnuts out of the fire, she will slip one of her 
Generals into supreme command of the allies, providing she 
is able to execute the death sentence she already has imposed 
upon Germany, and march proudly away with a "Thank 
you" on her treacherous lips to her duped allies, saying: 
"We killed the bear, the hide is all ours." 

England's alliance with Japan had two far-seeing objects 
in view — the first was to use Japan in this war which she 
has been framing up for years, to destroy Germany's com- 
mercial and military base in the Orient; the other to make 
use of Japan's assistance by way of the Pacific when she 
gets ready to deal with the United States as she is now 
dealing with, or thinks she is dealing with Germany; for 
England is as jealous and envious of American prestige as 
she is of German prestige, and if America don't soon wake up 
Japan will have planted her naval military bases from 
Tokio to San Francisco. What other interpretation can 
be placed on her occupations in the Marshall, Caroline and 
Ladrone Islands. England says when the war is over Japan 
will get out. In issues of this kind, fraught with tremendous 
consequences — but only for America — I would not believe 
England under oath. 

England has fouled the newspapers of the world with 
innuendo, wilful misrepresentation and malignant lies 
against Germany. Her first act in the war — which was 
heinous — was to absolutely cut Germany's communication 
with the outside world, so she could not defend herself 
against the calumnies of the bureaucratic press agency in 
London; and until the war was well under way the most 
of us believed these cunningly devised fables. The daily 
grist, however, of ridiculously exaggerated reports of the 
war in our metropolitan papers, so palpable that the "way- 
faring man though a fool" cannot be deceived by them, has 
changed all this, and we now begin to see clearly through 
England's infamous machinations against Germany. In- 
stance the London Morning Post's published interview with 



9 

Col. Roosevelt by her ''Special" Correspondent, Ernest A. 
Belcher, of January 1st, which was carefully sent to all our 
daily papers and which Col. Roosevelt on January 7th in 
the New York Times denied in toto. In her wild, frightened 
state England has gone too far in trying to hold the sym- 
pathy and public opinion of the world with her. 

In working up her alliances she first made sure that Italy 
would tear up her "scrap of paper" which had been sacredly 
entered into between that nation, and Germany and Austria. 
Does anybody suppose if that "scrap of paper" had not ex- 
isted between Germany and Italy in all sacredness so far 
as Germany was concerned, that Italy would have been 
permitted to take over Tripoli in the free and easy manner 
in which she did? England then worked upon the fears, 
prejudices and pride of France, Belgium and Russia, and 
also pointed out to France that the war to follow the alliance 
was her easy time to take back Alsace-Lorraine (to which, 
however, she has no more priority of territorial claim than 
has Germany). She raised before the representatives of 
these nations the same Hydra-headed bugaboo she is now 
holding up to us, and said to them, with this alliance we 
shall become the Hercules that will rid Europe forever of 
this monster — German Militarism. A little spark in Bel- 
gravia set off the conflagration and furnished England with 
her long waited for opportunity. But now she must justify 
her position before the world. She has no Napoleon and his 
new democratic government with which to play upon the 
fears of Europe and the credulity of the world, and this 
time her trump card becomes — the violation of Belgium's 
neutrality by Germany. She must have searched hard to 
find this excuse. In the light of recent revelations and in- 
dubitable facts supported by Belgium's own records taken 
from her own archives, BELGIUM HAD NO NEUTRAL- 
ITY TO VIOLATE. She threw it to the winds and virtually 
tore up her "scrap of paper" when she entered into a secret 
compact with England and France to not only permit them 
to come through her territory to attack Germany on her own 
border, but in addition agreed to cooperate with their armies 
to the fullest extent of her ability. She would run with 
the German hare, and hold with the British hounds. Please 



10 

notice from the text of this secret compact the part Belgium 
was to play in England's craftily-laid plot to control Eu- 
rope. Now, this understanding, thoroughly agreed to be- 
tween Belgium and England, was made in 190G. Is there 
a man so prejudiced in thought that he believes for one 
moment that Germany knew nothing whatever about this 
duplicity on the part of Belgium? If full proof of what I 
say here is desired, it may be found occupying the front page 
in the Fourth Section of the New York American of De- 
cember 20, 1914. If you are open-minded you will clearly 
realize that Germany would have been a stark fool to have 
waited until the allies poured their armies through Belgium 
on to German soil under the cunningly-laid plans of Great 
Britain. 

Dr. Bernhard Dernberg, former German Minister for the 
German Colonies, is authority for these revelations ; and up 
to date every statement emanating from Berlin, whether it 
be recording Germany's actions before the war, or reports 
of the fighting on both land and sea since war was declared, 
have been found to be absolutely correct ; and she steadfastly 
refuses to befoul herself by joining England in her frantic, 
mud-throwing campaign ; but with dignity of mien continues 
to treat with silent contempt the long-continued slanderous 
incitations made against her by the Bureaucratic Press 
Agency in London. 

Germany, through her highest representatives, so soon as 
she had the first opportunity to explain her position in the 
war, stated positively that the German Government knew all 
about this trickery of England, and double dealing of Bel- 
gium, and like any self-respecting nation recognizing her 
peril, did her utmost to carry the war to her enemies first. 

In the face of these stupendous revelations where must the 
responsibility rest for Belgium's woes — most certainly not 
on Germany's shoulders, and "the shock, the shout, the 
groan of war" wailing up to high Heaven from all Europe 
must soon bring Omnipotent interference ; and when it does, 
it may help us to understand the truth, in the divine retri- 
bution sure to follow, for "be sure your sin will find you 
out." We now come to an analysis and comparison of 



11 

Americanism. 

I said at the beginning that a little later I would use a 
third text. It is this — "Thou shalt not steal." I am sorry 
and pained to have to use this text in addressing myself 
to the subject of Americanism; but ''the truth shall make 
you free," and it is about time we had the courage to face 
the truth and stop our hypocracies and rid ourselves of our 
Pharisaism. Dr. Hillis says: ''AH over the land, teachers, 
fathers, editors, authors, have found it necessary to say to 
the young men and women of the Republic 'do not sign your 
name to an obligation unless you intend to keep it.' Keep 
your faith. Remember that your word should be as good 
as your bond. 'Swear to your own hurt, and change not.' 
All this is inevitable, as the result of Germany's trespass 
upon the property and homes of Belgium. In some European 
lands, the State is everything and the individual is noth- 
ing. In this Republic the individual is first, and the State 
is here to safeguard his rights, and see to it that no one tres- 
passes upon his property." Is this true? 

In the light of facts which I am going to present, this 
sounds as though it had been spoken by another Rip Van 
Winkle. I am sorry for Dr. Hillis. Sorry he has not been 
a better student of his own times during the past twenty 
years. THAT OUR FATHERS WHO LAID THE FOUN- 
DATION OF THIS REPUBLIC, STRONG AND DEEP, 
FOREVER INTENDED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL 
SHOULD BE FIRST AND THE STATE MERELY A 
SAFEGUARD TO HIS INALIENABLE RIGHTS, WHICH 
HAD BEEN SO UNMISTAKABLY DEFINED BY THE 
FRAMERS OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPEND- 
ENCE, THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT. The Federal con- 
stitution and the constitution of all the states followed this 
sublime declaration of sacred human rights. Today I am 
sorry to say we have torn to tatters the original "scrap 
of paper" solemnly contracted between the state and the 
individual. We are a nation of thieves, and I will prove 
it out of the records of the highest tribunals of the states 
and of the nation. While Dr. Hillis sits in his cozy library 
ensconced in his satin-lined slippers and silk study-gown, 



12 

thanking God we are not like other nations, hundreds of 
thousands of his fellowmen — nearly a half million in New 
York City alone, according to the figures given out by the 
leader of Labor organizations recently — are walking the 
streets in all of the commercial centers of our country, out 
of employment; wandering from place to place like men 
without a country and destitute of the most necessary com- 
forts of life. There is a reason; what is it? The men I 
am going to arraign have been throwing dust in our eyes, 
attributing our condition to the tariff, to the war, to every- 
thing but the right thing, namely, legalised graft and cor- 
ruption in Government from the lowest places to the highest. 
Under the beneficent laws that were to bulwark the indi- 
vidual's interests in this great Republic, men pursued their 
diversified avocations east, west, north and south, and pros- 
perity crowned the labors of her citizens. The laws were 
good to work under and did safeguard the individual's rights 
and property. Every state held out its welcoming arms and 
said "come thou with us and we will do thee good." Under 
this invitation and the protection of these simple laws, 
well understood by all, men formed themselves into co- 
partnerships, and then into corporations for the purpose of 
developing the industries of the nation from the vast and 
diversified raw materials in the difl'erent states. They dug 
for gold and silver ; they drilled for oil ; they built factories, 
public utilities, towering structures of commerce and finance, 
and warped the nation with wondrous bands of steel for 
rapid transportation, and woofed it with copper wires for 
lightning communication. Naturally these corporations grew 
apace, and with their growth, in many instances as phe- 
nomenal as the fabled Jack's beanstalk, the Nation expanded 
until she became the eighth wonder of the world, and THEN 
WHAT HAPPENED? The representatives of the Govern- 
ment became jealous and envious of the prosperity of these 
citizens, these corporations, and began systematically to 
graft upon them. When these citizens and corporations first 
invested their money, which the states were so eager to have 
put into the development of their industries; in most cases 
the state became a partner with the individual citizens and 
corporations, and made contracts with them and granted 



13 

them reasonable franchises and extended liberal terms so 
that they might be unfettered and unhampered in the em- 
ployment of labor and capital to the end that the largest 
possible returns might be had on their investment of money 
and industry. The politicians in the municipal govern- 
ments worked hand in glove with the politicians of the state 
governments and the politicians of the state governments 
made alliances with the politicians of the Federal Govern- 
ment. They became so bold in their graft operations on the 
successful citizens and corporations that rather than be 
wholly bankrupted they rebelled, and some few grafters were 
sent to prison ; thus making open and individual grafting 
dangerous. Then what do we see? Under the most amaz- 
ing subterfuges and all manner of trumped-up charges the 
grafters began a public indictment of these same individuals 
and corporations whom they had so generously received and 
welcomed into the business life of the various communities, 
and after worming and squirming their way into the state 
legislatures, under the apparently inoffensive plea of "regu- 
lating" the business of these citizens and corporations, passed 
laws of nullification and repudiation, the sequence of which 
enabled them to actually legally plunder and graft at will. 
The beneficent laws of the Fathers under which these busi- 
ness men and corporations engaged their industry, and en- 
trusted their capital, were amended or repealed as suited 
the purposes of the gang. The sacred contracts entered into 
between the states and these citizens and corporations, called 
Charters, which were supposed to "safeguard their rights 
and see to it that no one trespassed upon their property" 
were broken with impunity. The franchises granted by 
eager, anxious municipalities for the construction of water 
works, electric-light and gas plants, traction lines, and 
every kind of public utility, which an enlightened, cultured 
community requires and must have, were treated as mere 
"scraps of paper" and torn into shreds. Vast enterprises 
built up by patient toil, consummate ability and often under 
discouraging hardships, were condemned to destruction at 
the behest of these grafters to enable them to more evenly 
distribute the pelf. Establishments in the commerce of the 
world grown to greatness were hunted down by these politi- 



14 

cal "gunmen" and shot to pieces, so they could the better 
divide the quarry. Dr. Hillis may well ask : ''Can these things 
be true? Has repudiation and confiscation run riot 
through the nation just as after the Civil War? Can you 
prove your shocking allegations?'' Ah! and here's the rub; 
it shames me to produce the proofs, and it must shame any 
citizen of our country to review these proofs. I shall give 
only a scattered few, however, and let no one think they are 
isolated cases, for I could give a score or more from almost 
every state. If you doubt this go into the law library of 
your city, or into the office of any really representative law 
firm and ask to see the reports of the Supreme Courts of 
the States, and the reports of the Supreme Court of the 
United States. The following are given merely to guide you 
in your search : 

(Mich.) Detroit Citizens St. Ry. Co. vs. Detroit R. Co., 
184 V. S., 368 ; 

(111.) Freeport Water Co. vs. Freeport, 180 V. S., 587; 

(111.) Rogers Park Water Co. vs. Fergus, 180 V. S., 624; 

(Mo.) Joplin vs. Southwest Mo. Light Co., 191 V. S., 150 ; 

(Ky.) Owensboro vs. Owensboro Water Works; 

(Kans.) Hutchinson vs. Water Company; 

(Ohio) Hamilton Gas Light Co. vs. Hamilton, 146 V. S., 
258; 

(Texas) State of Texas vs. Waters Pierce Oil Co.; 

(Ga.) Columbus, Ga., vs. Mercantile Trust, 218 V. S.; 

(N. C.) Elizabeth City vs. Thrift, 122 N. C; 

(Texas) Brenham vs. Brenham, 67 Tex., 542; 

(Cal.) Madera Water Works vs. Madera, 228 V. S. 

In each of these citations the highest courts in the states 
where they originated sustained the political conspirators 
and permitted them to safely carry off their spoils of graft. 
Upon what hypothesis can such ruin be wrought? Let us 
now follow closely these most extraordinary court records, 
for they are the final symptoms guiding us in the diagnosis 
of our country's critical ailment at this time. The reasons 
given for the actions brought by the plaintiffs — that is, the 
municipalities and the states — were as the stars, without 
number, and varied from "monopoly," "restraint of trade," 
''trusts," "defective service," "insufficient supply," "over- 



15 

charge for services," etc., etc. The good old basic principle 
on which our Republic was really founded ''the individual 
is first and the state is here to safeguard his rights" was 
everywhere repudiated. The finest webs of deception were 
spun by spider lawyers in which innocent citizens and help- 
less corporations were enmeshed and greedily devoured. 
The hair-splitting construction and interpretations of the 
law, if you will take the time to read these court proceed- 
ings, are perhaps the most kaleidoscopic mental phenomena 
ever recorded in the annals of jurisprudence. The laws were 
so juggled, judges and juries so baffled, that it is no wonder 
our courts were changed from courts of justice to courts of 
law. The one supreme fact, however, that stands out in bold 
and startling relief amid all the twistings and turnings and 
perversions of the laws that fostered these great corporate 
industries is that the individual was rodbed of Ms heritage. 
For what is a corporation ? Is it a spineless entity? By no 
means. Every corporation is composed of men and often 
women who have heart and soul and mind, flesh, blood and 
feeling. Can the law of the thug and the thief be employed 
with impunity to individual citizens, presumably without 
hurt, because they happen to be conducting their business 
in corporate unison for economic reasons ? Can might make 
right in this instance when employed by the state? Perhaps 
Dr. Hillis will say these citizen-corporations offended and 
committed grievous wrongs against other citizens ; go to the 
records and read the history of these cases and you will 
find their chief offense has been that the commodities pro- 
duced by them are cheaper to the consumer than they ever 
were before in the history of the nation. Public utility com- 
panies were robbed because they were monopolies. Can you 
have two water companies in the average town or city? 
Could any one of several companies of investors earn inter- 
est if there were two or three lighting corporations or trac- 
tion systems in one community all bidding for the same 
business? No, these citizen-corporations were plucked wholly 
because they were successful. Their property was coveted 
by others who schemed and forced their way to power in the 
governing bodies of the state from municipality to national 
Congress; and with feudal strength they tore up the "scrap 



16 

of paper" that had been the pledge of the "safeguard of 
the rights of the individual" and guarantee against "tres- 
pass upon his property." Ah! Dr. Hillis, before we throw 
stones at our neighbors over the ocean, let us first get out 
of our own glass house ; before we stretch our hands across 
the sea to pull the beams from the eyes of Germany, let 
us pick the moats out of our own eyes. 

Does Dr. Hillis differentiate between the rights of the 
individual and those of a corporation? Very well; I will 
give you a case now in the Federal court where one single 
individual's interests are at stake and involved. Tryon, N. C, 
a little tuberculosis camp comprising about 500 people de- 
sired greatly the establishment of a water works system in 
their town. They had been depending on shallow wells and 
springs ; the springs merely dog wallows for the most part. 
They induced this one man to consider the proposition, and 
although he said to one of the leading citizens there that he 
knew it must be a pure philanthropy for a year or so, he 
thought it should in time pay a fair interest on the invest- 
ment. The man who was to furnish the money stipulated 
that the Franchise to be granted for the construction of 
the plant should be exclusive for a term of 35 years, and 
that during the life of the grant the town should not build 
a municipal plant, which would destroy the individual's 
property. To make sure that the plant would be constructed 
in a modern and up-to-date manner, and thus provide ade- 
quate service for all time, the man, under the advice of the 
Mayor and prominent citizens, was persuaded to employ the 
towTi's own engineer who resided in Tryon ; and whose pride 
certainly ought to have been enlisted in a public utility of 
such great value to the community. This engineer was given 
carte blanche to select the sources of supply, do all the engi- 
neering work incident to the laying out of the system, and 
provide plans and specifications for its completion. The 
work was so badly done by this engineer that it had to be 
practically done over again by another engineer brought 
there for the purpose. 

In order to provide this money with which to construct 
the enterprise, the man was obliged to borrow the money 
and put a mortgage on the only piece of property he had. 



17 

The plant has been established for seven years, during which 
time the people for the most part showed such scant appre- 
ciation of what had been done for them that it was like 
pulling teeth to collect the water rents. The owner of the 
plant employed several different superintendents living in 
the town who were cursed and brow-beaten by most of the 
citizens for even daring to try to collect the rents due from 
quarter to quarter. The rates had been fixed in the franchise 
and were exceedingly low. There are probably not a half 
dozen towns the size of Tryon in the entire United States 
that have a public utility water system. 

A little more than a year ago the owner, tiring of em- 
ploying local superintendents, and never having received any 
returns from his investment, employed a practical engineer 
and a man of sterling character and eflSciency to take charge 
of the plant as Superintendent. He began his duties by mak- 
ing the people pay up, and devoting himself to improving the 
service, which had been more or less deficient because of the 
incompetent work of the engineer in the beginning, and the 
lackadaisical management of the several previous superin- 
tendents. In proof that there could be a fair revenue derived 
from the investment, the new Superintendent put back into 
the plant the first year of his management over |2,000 in 
betterments. 

When the Superintendent began to cut off the water sup- 
ply from those who would not pay up, a great hue and cry 
went up to Heaven, and all manner of indictments were 
brought against the owner, and public opinion, poisoned to 
such an extent by a few political conspirators that the town 
started in to construct a municipal plant with no thought 
whatever of compensating the owner of the existing plant 
for the property they threatened to destroy. The man, who 
had nearly $18,000 of his money in the investment, and which 
represented about all he had in the world, was obliged to go 
into court to vindicate his rights. 

What kind of treatment was this to accord a man who 
had been nothing more or less than a philanthropist to the 
community all these years. The case is now in the courts 
and dragging its sluggish way with heavy expense to the 
owner, and unless th^ decree of the Federal Court of North 



18 

Carolina should be favorable and "safeguard the rights of 
this individual" and stop the municipality — the State — from 
stealing his property, it will have to be carried to the Su- 
preme Court of the United States, with ever-increasing legal 
expenses to the unfortunate defendant. 

I will cite Dr. Hillis to another case in his own State, 
where at Castleton the municipality determined to put in 
its own plant, and forced the few men who had taken over 
the system and brought it to a high state of eflSciency, and 
to where it was just beginning to pay, to take one-half what 
it was worth or lose the entire property. 

This graft virus has spread its poison through every artery 
of commerce and Government, until the entire body politic 
is inoculated, and the Nation groans and staggers with 
functional disorder. Our banks and trust companies are 
little better than pawn shops. A man I know was forced to 
make a loan for $16,000. He was obliged to pay 
the man who loaned the money a bonus of 10 per cent, in 
addition to the legal six per cent., and the broker five per 
cent.; here was 21 per cent, taken right out of his loan to 
start with. Each time he renewed he had to pay another 
five per cent. The security was increasing in value all the 
while, and the money shark decided to take it in. The man 
then called on the vice-president of a national bank; who 
said their bank could not handle such a loan, but for a 
"consideration" he would introduce him to a friend con- 
nected with a Trust Company that might make the loan, 
The loan was made. The borrower paid the vice-president 
of the bank a bonus of five per cent., the Trust Company a 
bonus of five per cent., and the lawyer |250; altogether the 
hard-pressed unfortunate paid about 18 per cent., for the 
use of the money for one year; and when the loan matured 
the Trust Company charged a renewal bonus of two per 
cent. Do you marvel that legitimate business is stricken 
and dies of anemia under such treatment? The money 
sharks say the poor devil ought to have been glad to get 
the money at any price. Isn't this a beautiful situation and 
condition for a country like America? 

What chance has a poor man in our courts today. Ah! 
says Dr. Hillis, there is where the rights of the individual 



19 

are sure to be vindicated. I will show you a moving court 
picture through its various stages. 

There was a certain rich man, the decadent scion of a 
great and noble family in New Jersey, who gave his written 
authority to a broker of modest means, to dispose of a piece 
of property which he owned. The property consisted of a 
public utility up the Hudson, which, through bad manage- 
ment, was nothing but a bunch of junk. The broker pre- 
pared a re-organization plan which in its feasibility appealed 
to and greatly pleased the Jerseyman. He worked indus- 
triously and patiently for more than a year through various 
avenues until he finally found his market. The net price to 
be paid the rich Jerseyman was $50,000. The broker sold 
the property for |7o,000 to a responsible firm of engineers 
who made a business of taking over neglected, abused public 
utilities and rehabilitating them. The excess above the 
$50,000 to be paid the owner was to be distributed in the 
usual order of such transactions: $10,000 to be divided be- 
tween the lawyer for the buyer and the lawyer for the seller, 
and $15,000 to the broker. The contract was drawn by the 
two lawyers cooperating, and the first payment under its 
terms which had been thoroughly understood and agreed to 
by the rich Jerseyman was laid down on his desk in the 
State Capital at Trenton for his acceptance. He knew the 
broker was getting $75,000 for his property. He did not 
know what the lawj'ers were getting. It was none of his 
business in any event, because he had agreed to $50,000 as a 
flat price for his property. His object in refusing the trans- 
action was to force the concern or the broker to give him a 
larger amount. At this point the deal fell through. The 
broker had unquestionably earned his commission. The rich 
man refused to concede him the slightest consideration for all 
his time and money spent in carrying through the deal. The 
broker's claim and right to his commission was so strong and 
so apparent that one of the leading attorneys at the New York 
Bar took the litigation on a contingent fee. 

The case was brought in the Federal court in New York 
City. The rich man in New Jersey being very prominent 
in the politics of his State, and holding a conspicuous posi- 
tion under an appointment of the then Governor Wilson of 



20 

that State, employed an ex-Tammany District Attorney to 
manage his interests, in the trial of the case. It was a jury 
trial. It was set ideally for the vindication of this poor 
broker's rights. A Federal Judge representing the national 
Government, the jury of twelve men representing the peers of 
their brotherman who sought at their hands simple justice. 
The evidence showed conclusively that the case was so one- 
sided as to make it farcical to go through with. The charge 
to the jury by the Honorable Judge was as fair as a one- 
sided case could be. It naturally was strong for the plaintiff. 
The broker and his lawyer were as confident of the result as 
though the decision had been made without the jurors leav- 
ing their seats. As it was about noon the jury indicated 
they would like to go to dinner first. The broker was pac- 
ing up and down the corridor when the bailiff approached 
him and said : "The jury is going out to dinner. Would you 
like to contribute one-half the cost of their dinner? The 
defendant has agreed to give one-half." The broker said, of 
course, and handed the bailiff |10.00. The jury went out 
and had a fine dinner at the old Astor House, came back to 
the juryroom and were there not five minutes when they 
filed into the court and rendered their decision unanimously 
against the phiintiff and for the rich man from New Jersey. 
Why did not the Federal Judge from his august place on 
the bench exercise his right to insist on justice for this poor 
man and set aside the verdict of that corrupt jury? The 
broker went out of that court room dazed and went back to 
his office and put his head in his hands and asked himself 
over and over again : "Am I in America or am I in Russia?" 

Here, Dr. Hillis, and now, as well as in olden times, and 
right in your own city and State, we have an excellent appli- 
cation of the illustration used by you in your sermon where 
the rich man took from the poor man his one ewe lamb. 

I could go on citing instance after instance, but I think 
it will be agreed by all that I have sufficiently proven my case. 

If you want to know what the public generally thinks 
about the business of going to law today, just take a look at 
T. E. Powers' cartoon in the comic section of the New York 
American of Sunday, January 3, 1915, entitled "He's Com- 
ing Back, Boys." While it is one of the funniest things 



21 

Powers has ever done, it is at the same time a wondrously 
suggestive and shocking illustration of what our courts stand 
for and permit all over our land today. 

Is it any wonder that the substantial, dependable busi- 
ness men of the country have locked up their capital, and 
buried their talent of genius for promotion, while they wait 
for the people responsible for our municipal, state and na- 
tional governments to come to their senses? Where there 
is no latitude in business opportunity there is no longitude in 
business fecundity. Latitude in opportunity does not mean 
license to trample the rights of others, of course ; but it does 
mean that all shall have a square deal without let or hin- 
drance from the poltroon politicians who have been and 
are the only serious leeches on the business of the country. 
Dr. Hillis who apparently is utterly out of touch with his 
fellows may opine that I am a disgruntled pessimist. Far 
from it, my whole nature is one of extreme optimism. 

Some one may say: Ah! this is only one man's opinion. 
Well, here is another. Perhaps the keenest, most incisive, 
clear thinking, farseeing business brain in this country today 
is that of Judge Elbert H. Gary. In an interview printed 
in the New York American of Jan. 3, 1915, he says : 



"The conditions were bad before the outbreak of 
the war, but this country was affected by influences 
unfelt elsewhere. There was the attitude of public 
oflScials and public administrators toward capital, 
which had been persistent for many years, and had 
resulted in attacks on business — sometimes with cause, 
it must be admitted, but often without just cause, 
and more frequently without reason or justice. 

"Rightfully or wrongfully, capital had become im- 
pressed with the idea that business was not as a rule 
receiving, and could not expect to receive fair treat- 
ment. It was a common thing for men of large means 
to discuss these questions, and almost invariably the 
statement was made that until public sentiment forced 
a change in the attitude mentioned, capital would be 
withheld from investment in enterprises calculated to 



22 

restore business to (what had been for many prosper- 
ous years) its normal standard. 

"The push and energy peculiar to the American 
business man lost its vim. He was dismayed and dis- 
consolate. The situation was unnatural to the Ameri- 
can people and there seemed to be a general inclina- 
tion on the part of capitalists to wait until the atmos- 
phere was cleared. Capital always is timid, and for 
several years there has been little in this country to 
give it confidence. 

"IT IS PROBABLY TRUE THAT BUSINESS IN 
THIS COUNTRY HAS BEEN WORSE SINCE THE 
WAR COMMENCED, YET IT IS DOUBTFUL IF 
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH IMPROVED 
WITHOUT THE WAR. 

"It is claimed by many, and it may be true, that 
business can become accustomed and adjusted to 
extreme changes in legislation, and it is to be hoped 
that we may become prosperous even with the law 
as it now stands. It is, however, certain that business 
has been depressed during the past year, hundreds of 
thousands of men have become idle, and that among 
big business men generally the reasons I have given 
are some of the influential factors in bringing about 
these conditions. 

"Adequate protection to the producers of material 
for sale, and for labor is essential to the highest pros- 
perity of the nation." 

This is Judge Gary's mild way of telling the country what 
I am telling in plainer speech and a little more forcible 
English. 

The men who are by choice of vocation the go-between in 
bringing together the seller and the buyer of securities are 
in a state bordering on utter despair under the present con- 
ditions. They are tired of spending their time and money 
calling on banks and investors to dispose of bonds and stocks 
that ought to be and normally are regarded as perfectly 
safe; to be told "we will not consider any securities issued 
under a charter granted by that State. They are repudia- 



23 

tionists. Property rights are not held sacred there." As 
this can now be said of so many States, new enterprises are 
necessarily halted, and going concerns are at their wit's end 
to obtain new capital, and wonder what is the trouble. When 
these states first invited capital into their borders they 
said "come thou with us and we will do thee good"; now 
they are sending up the frantic old Macedonian cry "come 
over and help us." Their cry falls upon deaf ears for the 
most part. 

Men and brethren, what must we do to be saved? Let us 
confess our sins and face unflinchingly the truth. "The 
Truth shall make us free." Let us go back to the old ideals 
that made our nation great, and to the simple, sane laws 
that made it safe. Laws made for all, and not for the few. Laws 
made to be kept in all good faith and conscience. Laws that 
cannot even by the most dexterous legal brain be twisted into 
a thousand meanings. No matter what the nation's re- 
sources; no matter what skill in organization and finance 
she may possess, unless there is common honesty in the 
recognition of human rights whether in the individual or 
individuals working together in a corporation, there can be 
no healthy expansion, no permanent progress. America is 
blessed above all other nations in position, opportunity and 
wealth and range of resources. 

"The rudiments of Empire here are plastic yet and warm, 
The chaos of a mighty world is rounding into form." 

The day-star of the Nation's hope and mission is not set ; 
it is only dimmed by the shortcomings and betrayals of 
those who were charged with keeping her gates and protect- 
ing and guarding her vast treasures. When we have driven 
them from these places where they have betrayed their trust, 
we shall again return to our rightful heritage and strength 
among the nations of the world, and go on to the great des- 
tiny vouchsafed to us under our sublime Constitution. 



Andrew B. Graham Company 
Washington, D. C. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 547 785 ft 



^fl 1- 



I 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ^ 

021 547 785 A 



Holline'er Coro. 



